Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (12/41)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

by any wording that indicates it. For if someone were to say, “I have married you to my daughter,” and the other replied, “I accept,” and he consummated the marriage with her, and she bore him children, or he died, or she died—then for us to say that the marriage was not concluded, despite knowing that both parties, the guardian and the husband, understand what is intended, is fraught with danger. The unquestionably correct view is that it is concluded by every expression that indicates it.

It is cited in the marginal notes that Shaykh al-Islam said (1): “No report has been transmitted from Ahmad that he restricted it to these two expressions. The first among Imam Ahmad’s followers to say this was Ibn Hamid; the Qadi and those who came after him followed him in that, owing to the widespread circulation of his books and the large number of his followers and associates.” Accordingly, it is not correct to attribute this view to the Imam’s own personal madhhab. Rather, it should be said: it is the conventional madhhab of Imam Ahmad. There is a difference between the personal madhhab which the Imam held as his religion before Allah, exalted is He, and the conventional madhhab. The conventional madhhab may be something the Imam never said, or even something contrary to what he held. It is what the followers of that Imam conventionally agree to regard as their madhhab—for example, when they select leading figures from among his followers and say, “If so-and-so and so-and-so, two leading figures among his followers, agree on such-and-such, then that is the madhhab,” or, “If most of the followers hold this view, then that is the madhhab.” The personal madhhab, however, is different: it is what he held as his religion before Allah, exalted is He. It may agree with what is conventionally called the madhhab, or it may differ from it.

“And I accept this marriage,” …

His statement, “And I accept this marriage,” is said by the husband or by one acting on his behalf. However, one acting on his behalf must not simply say, “I accept this marriage”; rather, he must say, “I accept it on behalf of my client, so-and-so.” Likewise, if the guardian has an agent, the agent should not say, for example, “I have married you to my daughter.” Rather, he must make clear that he is an agent, and say:

(1) Ibn Qasim's marginal commentary on al-Rawd al-Murbi', 6:247.

بكل ما دلَّ عليه؛ لأنه لو أن أحداً قال: جوزتك بنتي، وقال: قبلت، ودخل بها، وأتت منه بأولاد، أو مات، أو ماتت، فكوننا نقول: لا ينعقد، مع العلم بأن الطرفين، الولي والزوج، كليهما يعلم المراد فيه خطر، فالصواب قطعاً أن ينعقد بكل لفظ دلَّ عليه. ونقل في الحاشية عن شيخ الإسلام أنه قال (١): «ولم ينقل أحد عن أحمد أنه خصه بهذين اللفظين، وأول من قال ذلك من أصحاب الإمام أحمد ابنُ حامد، وتبعه على ذلك القاضي ومن جاء بعده؛ بسبب انتشار كتبه وكثرة أتباعه وأصحابه»، وبناء على ذلك لا يصح نسبة هذا القول إلى مذهب الإمام الشخصي، إنما يقال: هو مذهب الإمام أحمد الاصطلاحي، وهناك فرق بين المذهب الشخصي الذي يدين به الإمام لله ﷿ وبين المذهب الاصطلاحي، فالمذهب الاصطلاحي قد لا يكون الإمام قاله، أو قال بخلافه، وهو ما اصطلح عليه أتباع هذا الإمام أن يكون هو مذهبهم، مثل أن يختاروا أئمة من أتباعه، ويقولون: إذا اتفق فلان وفلان من أئمة أتباعه على كذا فهو المذهب، أو إذا كان أكثر الأتباع على هذا فهو المذهب، لكن المذهب الشخصي يختلف فهو ما يدين به لله ﷿، وقد يكون موافقاً لما قيل: إنه المذهب اصطلاحاً، وقد يكون مخالفاً. وَقَبِلْتُ هَذَا النِّكَاحَ، ............ قوله: «وقبلت هذا النكاح» يقوله الزوج؛ أو من يقوم مقامه، لكن من يقوم مقامه ما يطلق، ويقول: قبلت هذا النكاح، لا بد أن يقول: قبلته لموكلي فلان، كما أنه إذا كان الولي له وكيل، ما يقول الوكيل مثلاً: زوجتك بنتي، بل يبين أنه وكيل، فيقول:

(١) حاشية ابن قاسم على الروض المربع (٦/ ٢٤٧).